I guess there'll be no invites for us to the next IMA yuckity-yuck black-tie affair... ha ha.

An additional issue, however, which I didn't address in my correction, is if mendeleevite (the oxide "betafite of Hogarth 1977" version) actually occurs at Dara-i-Pioz, or if that's a part of the misnomer as well and so only the two new silicates occur there.  That "betafite" (whatever that is) might occur at Dara-i-Pioz is not geochemically implausible, so I was reluctant to make any changes in that regard without more information.  Although, as an aside, we should not be loading up localities with outdated mineral names, so my feeling is that if a Ca-Ti-dominant pyrochlore-supergroup oxide occurs there, we should nonetheless still discard the entry for 'mendeleevite'.

So, what additional changes should we do here to make this better?

As you suggest, the mendeleevite page should probably be changed to Mendeleevite (of ???).  I also propose the lone locality at Dara-i-Pioz of this antiquated name should also be removed, since I'm 99% sure that entry was intended to refer not to a synonym of the oxide, but rather to a "synonym" of the two silicates (which themselves are really distinct species and not synonyms of each other).

 ⁵ Vernadsky, Ac. Sc. St. Pétersbourg, Bull., 8 [2], p. 1368, (1914)

Is there an interest in having the full PDF uploaded to the mindat files?  If so, how do I do that?

Mendeleyevite is local variety of enriched by U pyrochlore from western part of Baikal lake area. This variety wasn't chemically analyzed in times, when it was named.

So Mendeleyevite unable to be found in Dara-i-Pioz, simply because Dara-i-Pioz don't located in Prebaikalie nor Transbaikalie. "Betafites" of Dara-i-Pioz hasn't any similarity with Mendeleyevites of Prebaikalie - the first grows in peralkaline pegmatites, are crystaline, with completely settled A group close to 2 apfu, while the later grows in usual granite pegmatites (similar to ones of Southern Norway), are metamict and cation deficient.

I only once analyzed real Mendeleyevite -


It turned out not belonging to Betafite of Hogarth at all, it is Uranpyrochlore of Hogarth and according to present nomenclature it is right on the border line between Hydroxylcalcipyrochlore and "zero-valent dominant" pyrochlores.

So the one locality given on the oxide "mendeleyevite" (of Vernadsky, I suppose) page (which is Dara-i-Pioz), can be removed, and the oxide mineral can have its "old name for _____" page with some historical information but with no specific locality.  That's probably the best way to treat it, anyway.

EDIT: OK, I deleted the oxide "mendeleyevite" from Dara-i-Pioz; the two silicates of course are still there. There's also an entry for betafite (of Hogarth) for the Dara-i-Pioz locality, but I left that one alone.